On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 09:31:55AM +0100, Jérôme Marant wrote: > Quoting Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > That was a 3:1 majority out of 200 voters, considering that Debian > > > counts almost 1000 developers and considering that many pros are > > > convinced they have been deceived. > > Referring to 20% of your fellow developers[1] as a "very loud [extremist] > > minority" is absurd, particularly when only 5% of the remaining "majority" > > could be bothered to vote against. You may not agree with the decision that > > was taken, but insulting your peers for their views on the question just > Not all pros in this GR are what I call extremists. I suspect some of them > did not expect the consequences of modifying the SC that way. After all, > weren't they editorial changes? Ah. I didn't understand earlier that you meant you felt deceived by the GR as someone who voted in favor of it. This is rather surprising to me; I was taken off guard by the immediate consequences of the GR, but I had no doubt as to its intended meaning -- i.e., that all bits in the archive should be treated under the same rules. > > makes you look like an ass. If you really think this vote was stolen from > > the majority, put your money where your mouth is -- find five other > Where the hell did I say it was stolen from the majority? Were you being gratuitously crass when you said > Extremists are a minority but a very lound minority as usual which makes > them often win. in response to >> A 3:1 majority win in 2004-04 makes your claim rather tenuous, unless you >> are arguing that such a large part of Debian is composed of extremists, >> only. ? If you meant it sincerely, the only way I can read it is as a statement that the GR only passed because of a vocal minority. If this is true, how does this *not* imply that there is a silent majority that disagrees with the outcome? > I just said you cannot draw conclusions about the consent of 1000 > developers, out of a 3:1 majority among 200 developers. Period. Well, no, by mentioning extremist minorities I think you were doing quite a bit more than saying we can't draw conclusions; but anyway, your point is clear now. > I'm not happy with the results, but I've never questions the validity > of the vote. Hmm, fair enough; your comments did seem awfully parallel to those of Marco, who *does* question the validity of the vote (repeatedly...). > > BTW, votes in Debian *are* public, you know; and > > <http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/gr_editorial_tally.txt> clearly shows you > > voted in favor of modifying the Social Contract. Could you make up your > > mind which vocal minority you intend to be a part of, please? > I thought it was editorial changes, but it looks it was not. > I thought there were some bits of common sense with interpreting DFSG, > so modifying the SC was OK. But it seems _some_ people wants that > "every byte in main shall be covered by a free software license, whatsoever". > I think it is insane, so modifying the SC was not a good idea after all. Well, as I said, if you don't think this is the correct outcome, it's in your power to change it. I think that developers changing their minds about a particular ballot option *is* a legitimate reason to have a new vote. I would rather see a second vote on the same question, than to see developers feeling that their project has been co-opted by an extremist minority. I disagree that I'm an extremist and I don't believe that I'm a minority, but I do respect your right to prove me wrong. :) -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
